|
Post by JoeRockss on Dec 17, 2008 22:49:34 GMT -5
By: aladin99 17 Dec 2008, 10:39 PM EST Msg. 787589 of 787595 (This msg. is a reply to 787581 by sportsman93306.) Jump to msg. #
Sportman - NSS settlement will be huge and we deserve it....they have been raping millions not 50K shareholders... - - - - -
|
|
|
Post by JoeRockss on Dec 17, 2008 22:52:34 GMT -5
By: sportsman93306 17 Dec 2008, 10:34 PM EST Msg. 787583 of 787596 Jump to msg. #
BOBHWONG SAID 7 CENTS.EM
|
|
|
Post by JoeRockss on Dec 17, 2008 22:53:43 GMT -5
By: aladin99 17 Dec 2008, 10:32 PM EST Msg. 787579 of 787596 (This msg. is a reply to 787576 by sportsman93306.) Jump to msg. # Sportman - Above 10c... to be reasonable...JE is paying his and the NSS has no way out!!!!!! ~No one will be jailed but Madoffs.... ~ GLTU!!!!!!!!! - - - - -
|
|
|
Post by JoeRockss on Dec 17, 2008 22:56:00 GMT -5
By: aladin99 17 Dec 2008, 08:46 PM EST Msg. 787549 of 787596 (This msg. is a reply to 787547 by nss-kooks.) Jump to msg. #
NSS - Did you read page 13???
That was how much SEC said JE made.... - - - - -
|
|
|
Post by JoeRockss on Dec 17, 2008 22:59:19 GMT -5
By: aladin99 17 Dec 2008, 08:25 PM EST Msg. 787539 of 787597 Jump to msg. # ***JE is banned permanently from participating in any offering of a penny stock.... ***JE agreed to pay $2,013,046.39 in prejudgment interest.... Conclusion: ***UC did not pay anything...Why?? What happened to the brokers/bankers who shorted/Naked Shorted CMKX? How could they get away when JE is paying for his crime? viewer.zoho.com/docs/qc5dKi- - - - -
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 7:53:48 GMT -5
Thanks JustJanet.... By: gusjarvis 18 Dec 2008, 12:01 AM EST Msg. 787614 of 787617 Jump to msg. # george burns numbers again my friends! 590 billion that is what george said was the naked short of cmkx if you do the reverse math on gemm and ucad divvies during their run ups. The official end of the ticker was that exact number 590 billion. And remember the records of the fraud were obtained sept 5th o4: "From December 2002 through September 2004, on approximately 60 separate occasions, 1st Global issued a total of more than 589.7 billion shares of CMKM stock in certificate form without a restrictive legend to the Edwards Entities, Edwards’ nominees, Casavant’s nominees, and others." the certs were used to cover the naked short and the cert pull forced the cover and ended up at the exact naked short george said and is in this court case! But they made it look like john edwards dumped the share raises to us, that didn't happen and john edwards didn't sell 590 billion naked shares. Him, tdwaterhouse, etrade, ameritrade, other brokers, other hedge funds did. We know je sold 259 billion, not 590, so why they make it look like he did when we know he didn't. The certs simply were used to cover the short they already knew, it is clear now, and that is why roger isn't in jail. We also now know exactly what this was as we know the stock was naked shorted, the most ever, and we know every cert from the share raises was tracked when sold. They were tracked as they were used to cover the short, simple. ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CMKI&read=787614
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 8:21:08 GMT -5
JasonBourne DIAMOND DIGGER Re: Unprecedented 'Just what we awaited'! « Reply #13 Yesterday at 8:08pm »
Remember what Adobe said years ago: deep global economic crisis, banks will fail, nations will re-align, we will be paid in the context of many suffering around us, etc. Sounded unbelievable at the time -- who would have thought at that time that this meltdown would actually come to pass. Let's hope the pay part comes to pass too.
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 8:37:57 GMT -5
By: jlecks 18 Dec 2008, 01:01 AM EST Msg. 787618 of 787627 Jump to msg. #
"Thus, the Court has discretion to impose a penalty as high as 569 times $120,000 or 569 times $26.4 million."
Purely rumor-based speculation; but a "convenient" form of distribution:
569 x $26.4million / 700 billion shares = $.021/share.
Interesting to revisit all those "R" x 3 hypotheses.
Of course, Jay always spoke about "interest..."
JMO
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 10:07:56 GMT -5
wonder why??By: lilburrito0 18 Dec 2008, 09:46 AM EST Msg. 787645 of 787654 (This msg. is a reply to 787641 by aladin99.) Jump to msg. # aladin99 Re: UC did not have any account like JE so UC pays nothing, NUFCED??? LOL The filing for JE was the filing for JE. The filing for UC will be the filing for UC. UC's "account" has not been filed, yet!
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 12:31:15 GMT -5
thanks pennypauly.......
rodgranite's Information Personal Info Interests & Background [rodgranite] Name: Email: Private Total posts written: 17 Member since: Wednesday 14-Feb-2001
By: rodgranite 18 Dec 2008, 10:02 AM EST Msg. 787654 of 787659 (This msg. is a reply to 787651 by JUMBOJET.) Jump to msg. #
No...
my sources are higher up the food chain.
By: rodgranite 18 Dec 2008, 09:57 AM EST Msg. 787649 of 787659 (This msg. is a reply to 787647 by stockrich0.) Jump to msg. #
It is based upon..
information I have received from people I consider reliable.
By: rodgranite 18 Dec 2008, 09:52 AM EST Msg. 787646 of 787659 (This msg. is a reply to 787293 by bhollenegg.) Jump to msg. #
bhollenegg
I just try and do what I can to get the truth out there, as you do. Those that sneer and are unappreciative will get their cut as well, as they should. It is a shame that the fact that there have been small delays makes so many people so jaded. Issues of this magnitude cannot be dealt with quickly.
By: rodgranite 18 Dec 2008, 09:43 AM EST Msg. 787644 of 787658 (This msg. is a reply to 787618 by jlecks.) Jump to msg. #
No way
If I only got 2 cents a share I would only get a few million dollars. I am not going to accept that now. There are much bigger numbers to be used.
By: rodgranite 18 Dec 2008, 09:40 AM EST Msg. 787643 of 787655 Jump to msg. #
The settlement...
has been set aside. The timing of the release is the only variable.
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 12:35:08 GMT -5
Goodolboy Chief Administrator Edwards-Bagley« Thread Started Today at 9:13am »
In the recent SEC motion for summary judgement, I found a few comments quite interesting. The relationship between Helen Bagley and John Edwards dates back to 1999, prior to Helen opening 1ST Global. John also "loaned" Helen $200,000. 1St Global was opened in 2001. Helen basically did whatever Edwards told her to do.
So, is it just me in thinking Edwards created his own transfer agency just for these pump and dumps?
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 12:40:28 GMT -5
Thanks JustJanet.... By: gusjarvis 18 Dec 2008, 12:01 AM EST Msg. 787614 of 787617 Jump to msg. # george burns numbers again my friends! 590 billion that is what george said was the naked short of cmkx if you do the reverse math on gemm and ucad divvies during their run ups. The official end of the ticker was that exact number 590 billion. And remember the records of the fraud were obtained sept 5th o4: "From December 2002 through September 2004, on approximately 60 separate occasions, 1st Global issued a total of more than 589.7 billion shares of CMKM stock in certificate form without a restrictive legend to the Edwards Entities, Edwards’ nominees, Casavant’s nominees, and others." the certs were used to cover the naked short and the cert pull forced the cover and ended up at the exact naked short george said and is in this court case! But they made it look like john edwards dumped the share raises to us, that didn't happen and john edwards didn't sell 590 billion naked shares. Him, tdwaterhouse, etrade, ameritrade, other brokers, other hedge funds did. We know je sold 259 billion, not 590, so why they make it look like he did when we know he didn't. The certs simply were used to cover the short they already knew, it is clear now, and that is why roger isn't in jail. We also now know exactly what this was as we know the stock was naked shorted, the most ever, and we know every cert from the share raises was tracked when sold. They were tracked as they were used to cover the short, simple. ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CMKI&read=787614 By: leowanta 18 Dec 2008, 11:41 AM EST Msg. 787679 of 787711 (This msg. is a reply to 787614 by gusjarvis.) Jump to msg. # well tell georgie he is wrong, he didn't take into account the share retirement fall-winter of 2003 which liquidated the LEGITIMATE shares....still in the market AFTER the July 2003 FORM 15 filing which made every share after that date UNREGISTERED, therefore, i don't care what bagley did....the shares were unregistered and therefore INVALID in georgies count..... nobody gave Bagley the power to override the FORM 15....if she certificated unregistered shares after july 2003, she needs to go to jail....and those shares cannot be counted in any legitimate share count..... back to the drawing board georgie...i know for a fact that december 2003 there were less than 98million shares after uc retirement.... spring of 2004 he went to the nev sos and got 200 billion increase but the shares increase added to unregistered shares...then uped it again by 300b to make it 500b unregistered shares...then august uped it again by 300b to make it 800b of unregistered shares.....all the while as jefferies showed us 111billion was trading under the tape and that is just ONE hedge fund.....that doesn't include bear stearns and the rest of those fraudsters.....4.1 trillion was my figure....sec says of the 622 billion it's time 9 that was really traded...above and below the tape....around the world.... leowanta
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 12:42:20 GMT -5
By: leowanta 18 Dec 2008, 11:48 AM EST Msg. 787690 of 787712 (This msg. is a reply to 787680 by rosencrantz2010.) Jump to msg. #
nobody in this mess will go to jail....the accoutable fault is with the regulators who allowed this MORASS to go on....if they jail one...they gotta jail their own that isn't going to be admitted or even sought after by the doj because the all of the officials at the sec for years gone by would go to jail....every secry since the 90's would go to jail along with glenn, uc, and others....it's just too large the fraud is market wide...every bank officer CEO would go to jail, they were all implicated...look at all the failing banks now ...they are failing because they have to mark to market...ACCOUNT FOR NSS...and it's eating them alive....
the short sale rule should be totally repealed...no short selling should be allowed as in "borrowing stock" to sell...that's just opening the door to fraud.
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 12:44:19 GMT -5
By: zahnj 18 Dec 2008, 11:52 AM EST Msg. 787694 of 787712 (This msg. is a reply to 787618 by jlecks.) Jump to msg. # I've seen speculation about the judgement against Edwards. There are several flaws in the speculation about us getting paid as a result of a judgement against John Edwards. First the man is a crook. What are the chances of collecting anything from a man who's had months if not years to hide the money in England (he's a British citizen), in China (isn't that where his wife is from?) and in off shore accounts? Secondly it's the discretion of the SEC to distribute any money collected as a result of the judgements they hope to get. The SEC could keep the money. They could distribute the money to shareholders through Fair Funds. And I think they could also return it to the current company in Tyler Texas jmho
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Dec 18, 2008 12:50:29 GMT -5
By: rosencrantz2010 18 Dec 2008, 11:56 AM EST Msg. 787697 of 787713 (This msg. is a reply to 787694 by zahnj.) Jump to msg. #
zahnj, why hasn't a grand jury returned an indictment on EDWARDS?
By: zahnj 18 Dec 2008, 12:02 PM EST Msg. 787703 of 787713 (This msg. is a reply to 787697 by rosencrantz2010.) Jump to msg. #
From what i hear shareholders are getting calls from a lawyer who's working in conjuntion with a grand jury. I don't know if that involves Edwards, But there's nothing that would preclude a grand jury indictment or federal prosecution. Looks like the SEC got first crack with their suit. And they have a civil complaint pending as well
:)By: rosencrantz2010 18 Dec 2008, 11:58 AM EST Msg. 787699 of 787713 Jump to msg. #
if EDWARDS isn't facing indictment then URBAN won't be indicted either.
|
|